|
myrmidon
Nov 16, 2004, 3:55 PM
Post #26 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2004
Posts: 82
|
no serious climber would ever look to this, or any other website for actual information about routes. the database is for self humping purposes only.
keep spankin' & crankin'
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Nov 16, 2004, 4:33 PM
Post #27 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
On the other hand, how much should you say about a climbing area or route if there already is a guidebook? (Now surely RC.com is not meant to replace guidebooks, but that does not stop us from trying to use it as such.)
When I add to routes here on RC.com, I often purposefully avoid using route names and specifics as they are written in the local guidebook, should it exist. Especially if it is a small area, where I know a quality guidebook is being or has been created to service new climbers at very little profit to the creators.
This is a hard decision because the socialistic side of me wants to share everything I know about a climbing area--but then I realize that this would be a disservice to the guidebook. For this reason I feel ambivalent about the route DB, because if it's potential was fulfilled, and it became a comprehensive national guide, then what would become of good old guidebooks?
And what would become of the route DB if it did indeed become that useful, comprehensive, and detailed? Would it still be free, and subject to editing by users? Would we all be labeled as commies and deported? :o
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Nov 16, 2004, 5:04 PM
Post #28 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
I'm thinking a bit more radically - I think the RDB should have a visual interface more similar to DrTopo but it could be done with images rather than PDF's. In other words, RC could provide a series of generic images or a legend and individuals could create route images or crag images that they could upload. I really don't think it ruins the adventure of climbing, it's not like non-climbers are getting this information and then showing up at the crags to gawk.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't respect sensitive areas, etc. But I think the RDB should be more of a resource and right now it's often a dead end. A lot of the descriptions get you no where and more likely to create problems for noobs and annoyances for experienced climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Nov 16, 2004, 5:55 PM
Post #29 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Heres a question for you guys: Say a new area has popped up. The areas developer has requested that any route information NOT be put onto databases such as this one. His reasoning is he feels it would detract from the sales of the new guidebook; which all proceeds go towards develpoment cost(bolts, hangers, chains, printing cost, etc)
kind of depends on how you feel about the guy. if he's a local who's worked hard on the crag and wants to document it, I wouldn't screw him over. if he's just trying to mark his territory, and there are no access issues or other concerns... well, that's up to you.
What goes around comes around, though. That's all I'm really saying. Treat people the way you'd expect to be treated, or don't be surprised when you become a local pariah.
In reply to: I feel this is completely fair for the initial "newness" of an area, say a year or so, to let everyone buy the guide. Honestly I'll probably buy a guide, donate money AND volunteer with labor.
Sounds like you have your head screwed on straight, I wish everyone else were this sane. Bob D'Antonio, who is taking over the creative and business direction for the routesdb, will no doubt be encouraged that folks like you exist. He's also working on a hybrid solution, where someone like Vogel can post up a 'Select' guide to, say, a few dozen classic routes as a (cheap, but NOT free) downloadable PDF, and then we have a link to their definitive guidebook to the area presented underneath. It's not the most original business model in the world, but not every route has or needs a SuperTopo!
FWIW, there are a lot of changes in the pipe for the routes database. We've had a recurring problem with vandalism (because, after all, if someone can't troll, can't harass others via PM, can't post photo comments... the last thing they do before getting the chop is invariably to add bogus routes or change existing beta) so instead of not letting anyone update, the plan is to use the Articles-style solution of retaining multiple revisions. If some piece of shit comes along and replaces a number of historical ascents with 'asdf', the manager will now be able to 'revert' the routes to their previous state, and change the settings on the vandal's account so they are no longer permitted to twiddle routes. (innocent until proven guilty -- the routes database was, after all, built by regular users)
Also, this gives us the ability to distinguish a route's initial documentor (eg. who put it into the routesdb) from the most recent updater (who added the last round of comments) and there's a field for the first ascent party along with their style. These are all 'guts'-level changes -- they'll become much more obvious when the per-route page goes live. Having each route in its own page has worked for climbingboulder.com, SuperTopo, and many other sites -- it's about time we migrated to this style of presentation. Obviously, that means having comments like the photos do; does anyone have a preference for 'linked forum threads' (which show up on the FP) versus 'photo comments' (which don't)?
This is all sitting around on the development server, waiting to get an interface thrown on. Oh, I almost forgot -- we have a huge pile of maps that Lonely Planet donated in exchange for a link back to their guidebooks. That's the new geographic interface. In addition, John Robinson made a sizable donation to fund the creation of a partners database, along with a 'Texas Mile' estimator for geographic proximity. The hooks for that went into the codebase last night. It's actually starting to become a lot of fun renovating the routesdb.
Now that search is substantially improved, the routesdb is the focus for new development (as opposed to bug fixes, eg. registration must be fixed immediately). So if you have any suggestions that would radically improve it, and aren't taken care of above, post up.
I hope this helps clarify where we intend to go with the routesdb. It's always been a sad second fiddle to the photographs that everyone loves, but there's so much potential and so many people (guides, guidebook authors, local land managers, AF surrogates) who contact us about making it better, that eventually we could not look the other way any longer. Besides, like I said, it's fun to build a better mousetrap.
Flame on...
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Nov 16, 2004, 5:58 PM
Post #30 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: Say a new area has popped up. The areas developer has requested that any route information NOT be put onto databases such as this one. His reasoning is he feels it would detract from the sales of the new guidebook; which all proceeds go towards develpoment cost(bolts, hangers, chains, printing cost, etc) Tough s---. Information wants to be free.
Information wants to be false (and anthopomorphized).
Entropy wants to increase.
People want free stuff.
But you can't always get what you want, and that's fine by me... sometimes the easy way out is not the optimal solution. (well, let's be real here, ON VERY RARE OCCASIONS it isn't)
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Nov 16, 2004, 6:52 PM
Post #32 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
It totaly depends on the area. I use the data base to find climbs or areas that are not published in the guide. We found stuff before our last trip that was usefull. i still firmly belive that you should buy a guide to support the locals at you destination. The most usefull data is of areas that dont have a guide or new rts that are not in the guide. In those cases you are a tool if you just enter the name+ grade of the climb without directions on how to find the climb. A good section has good directions on how to find the area, services in the area, Local contacts, how to find the climbs, protection grade of the climbs and were to buy a guide book. It is up to the users to put the time and effort into updating the area. If there is a guide you only need to publish a few standouts, new climbs and general description as well as info on buying the guide. Some areas have good user input and some don't.
|
|
|
|
|
le_bruce
Nov 16, 2004, 11:23 PM
Post #33 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 29, 2004
Posts: 60
|
The format used by climbingboulder.com (or jtree, redrocks, etc) in their route database is bomber: intuitive, easily navigated, adaptive, and democratic.
I've found that routes take on more personality, become something like spoken word artefacts of folk, when there is a forum for people to comment on them. There are routes in every area that have been elevated to mythic status - for those who've climbed it and for those who haven't - because of the reputation they earn through spoken word. The fact that it's happening now online, typed-word, rather than at the local pub is sad, yeah, but pretty in-step with the way the world's changed.
I've got dozens of guidebooks and won't stop buying them. A routesdb that realizes its potential will be a good thing, allowing for a richer climbing (sub)(counter)(anti)- culture. :arrow:
|
|
|
|
|
grayrock
Nov 17, 2004, 12:13 AM
Post #34 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2004
Posts: 46
|
I have read the preceding posts with interest. I feel the concerns that the RDB would detract from some author’s sales is healthy to consider but not valid as a reason to not use RDB. I would never take a PC to the crag to check RDB for beta before I climb. It is at the crag that I really need the guidebook. OK, you use the guide book or RDB before you go to the crag to plan a trip, but RDB does not now and may never have what we can get and need from a guidebook.
Now I may suffer from regional myopia, and if I am, I am sure you will let me know, but from my experience, the day a guidebook hits the shelf it is obsolete. Routes pop up so fast that guide books can’t keep up; at least in Utah. It may not be like that in other places.
It seems to me that there is room for both guidebooks and the RDB and we should do what ever we can do to use RDB to promote areas we are familiar with with good, useful information.
I recently went to Maple Canyon, Utah with Darren Knezek, who, along with others, is preparing a guidebook for selected areas in Northern Utah. I posted in RDB a couple of climbs we did there. Now someone mentioned we do this to “hump” ourselves up. Well, that may be, but I hope at least one of my stronger motives might be to provide enough information to excite someone else to try the same route if I thought it was worth it. I also like RDB to be kind of a journal that I can refer back to, to jog my memory of which routes I had fun on.
By the way, Darren happened to mention that he saw one of my posts mentioning Maple Canyon and he encouraged me to continue. He had absolutely no fear of losing any sales. To me he is clearly motivated to promote the sport of climbing and the area of Maple Canyon and others. I realize that other authors may be justified in holding on to there information until there book comes out; their circumstances must warrant it. If any of you get down this way, stop in at Mountainworks in Provo, Utah and ask anyone of the great folks there about where to go and what is going on. Mountainworks greatest asset is it’s employees.
Some have mentioned that they don’t want beta on specific moves on a route. At first I thought they are seeking an on-site; but after reading on I thought perhaps the beta would spoil the challenge and the adventure. Personally, I like that kind of information sometimes. I was wondering if you folks would comment on whether it would be objectionable to give specific move information on say routes form 5.5 to 5.8. No one is going to brag about an on-site there. What specific information can one give and not spoil it for others? I would guess the length of the route, the number of bolts, the number and types of pro, the kind of rock, the general types of holds (i.e. a lot of crimps), of course what the route is rated, and maybe a star system.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Nov 17, 2004, 12:56 AM
Post #35 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
philbox moved this thread from General to Suggestions, Questions & Feedback..
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Nov 17, 2004, 2:10 AM
Post #36 of 36
(3256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Just a few points.
Guidebooks and adventure are a bit exclusive of each other. You want an adventure, you go somewhere or climb some climb that is not in the guide book.
The idea that no serious climber would post or look in the RDB is wrong. A fairly famous (or infamous) southern climber used to post routes in there that were done after the guide came out.
As for the RDB having a bad impact on guide book sales, consider that the guide book author, if he is worth a crap, has gotten information from the FA parties about their routes. He has asked other climbers what they thought of the routes. He has looked into the facilities near the climbing area. He has put in directions to the climbing area from several directions. The info in the guide book is probably going to be a good bit better than what is in the RDB. So the RDB serves as an attention getter, as someone already mentioned. Seeing the RDB descriptions of an area might actually encourage someone to get the guide book.
ON the other hand, woe be unto the jerk that plagurizes route info from a published guide and puts it in the RDB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
